Forum rulesThe General Discussion Forum is for topics that do not fall into categories covered by other forums. However, religion and politics are off limits. Also, flaming, trolling, and spam will not be allowed in General Discussion.

In Rest In Peace (RIP) threads, bashing on the recently deceased is not allowed.

Please note - Threads in the General Discussion forum auto prune after 260 days of inactivity.

I mean, a tiny tattoo on someone's ankle of a dolphin is a somewhat different matter than an extensive "tramp stamp". One can be ignored or focused past, while the other is rather "in your face" whenever one is intimate in a certain position.

I'm also wondering about the motivations of someone who thinks altering their body in a noticeable way has nothing to do with a spouse, who is supposed to be one's partner in life, usually best friend and often primary adviser. Yet many to whom I've spoken over the years on this matter indignantly say, "It's none of his/her business." That seems, to me, logically flawed at best and downright selfish at worst.

Assuming there's good communication in the relationship, I would suppose my spouse/SO would mention their interest in getting the tattoo and we would discuss it, and I'd get a chance to offer my opinion. I wouldn't assume I'd have veto power over their decision.

I'm not sure what you mean by an extensive "tramp stamp." Is it simply a question of size, or also dependent on subject matter?

Michael wrote:Assuming there's good communication in the relationship, I would suppose my spouse/SO would mention their interest in getting the tattoo and we would discuss it, and I'd get a chance to offer my opinion. I wouldn't assume I'd have veto power over their decision.

I'm not sure what you mean by an extensive "tramp stamp." Is it simply a question of size, or also dependent on subject matter?

I meant size, but I suppose subject matter would be relevant, too. A motif of butterflies and flowers is marginally less objectionable than a pair of snakes swallowing each other's tails around the phrase "slut by choice".

I got my first (and at the moment only) tattoo when I turned 50. No one to answer to/discuss with at that time. It's simple, means a lot to me, and it actually gave me a decided feeling of freedom . I have a second one planned. I'll get it when *I* feel the timing is right.

I got my ears pierced at 16... needed my mom's permission for that. *L* Fortunately, she didn't care, but I think I would have been very resentful if she had. I'm very much of the "get what you want" persuasion. Discussion is cool....but in the end, you make your choice.

Depending on how serious the relationship is then a partner would get a say or opinion, but they should know you well enough to know what your taste is and if it's something you want or has great meaning they won't be able to talk you out of it. After all it is your body and you can do what you like with it.

I have a tattoo myself and don't mind some on a partner, though nothing excessive.

Bry_Sinclair wrote:Depending on how serious the relationship is then a partner would get a say or opinion, but they should know you well enough to know what your taste is and if it's something you want or has great meaning they won't be able to talk you out of it.

And there isn't a relationship serious enough that would allow a person's partner the right to say, "Gosh, I really don't like that, and I'm the one looking at it all the time; let's not go there" and fully expect the person that supposedly loves them to say, "OK"?

I mean, certainly if you start dating someone with a lot of tats, expecting them to suddenly put a moratorium on further ink or even begin having them removed is preposterous. Yet if he/she has only a few discrete ones, it's a valid discussion.

But if you don't have any and your spouse/SO can't stand 'em, to then go and get one says something about a person, too, doesn't it? And from where I sit, it doesn't say anything good.

Bry_Sinclair wrote:After all it is your body and you can do what you like with it.

In my opinion, it is no longer just your body if you are married or in a profoundly serious relationship. To assert that, from where I sit, speaks to an egocentrism and post-adolescent selfishness endemic to many if not most modern adults.

Right now, I'm thinking in particular of a young woman with whom I work. She's of an age that could leave her my daughter ... but I'm a guy, and I unapologetically look: Pretty face, dimples, sweet disposition, and an amazing body ... which she has marred and nigh-ruined, aesthetically-speaking, with numerous body tattoos, lip/nose-piercings, and ear gaugings that would do a Masai noblewoman proud.

I just don't understand it. To me, it's self-mutilation, especially in one young and lovely. It's like a rejection of the gifts you've been given.

If you have medium length hair and your SO loves long hair and hates short hair....and at medium length you can barely stand it and want it cut off short... Does your SO have the right to say, "Don't cut it." After all, they will be the person looking at it all the time....

I guess it's different if you've ever been in a relationship where your SO thought they had the right to make these decisions for you.

If you have medium length hair and your SO loves long hair and hates short hair....and at medium length you can barely stand it and want it cut off short... Does your SO have the right to say, "Don't cut it." After all, they will be the person looking at it all the time....

I guess it's different if you've ever been in a relationship where your SO thought they had the right to make these decisions for you.

Not "the right to make those decisions for you", Quo. The expectation that their word and desires should have tremendous weight on a decision that affects them as profoundly as it does their spouse.

All SOs can't be held responsible for every controlling asshole that ever lived.

Frankly, I think the spouse should have the final say, so long as it doesn't involve mutilation or humiliation. Again, the person to whom you're closest is saying, "Please don't permanently change yourself in that way. I can't stand it." In my opinion, a spouse should then say, "OK. Normally I'd do this, but we're a partnership, and on things like this, you should have a veto." Ultimately, he/she can instead say, "I'm sorry; I know you don't like it, but it's very important to me, and I'm doing this. You'll just have to learn to deal with it." And if it is truly important, then the spouse should suck it up and accept it. But if it's just because the person thinks it'd be cool or bad-ass, and does it even though their spouse/SO has said, "Please, no," he or she is being a narcissistic prick/twat. If it's equally important to both, err on the side of not changing.

Different taste in clothes should be a source of affectionate exasperation. If a person likes, say, bell bottoms and their spouse thinks they're ridiculous ... oh, well. They're wearing something else the next day, after all.

Hair is changeable. One can perhaps work out a compromise wherein one has their hair the way they like it for a while, and then let it grow to where their spouse likes it. Lovers should be willing to compromise. Lovers should want to please each other.

(Oh, and ... I used to keep my hair at a length of which my now ex-wife approved ... precisely because she was the one who had to look at it. As to beards, I kept myself clean-shaven or grew one with the understanding that kisses whilst I had stubble would be few and far between. I also tended to ask before switching from one to the other. )

Even piercings are removable. If a man/woman gets one and their SO doesn't like it, they can have one for a while, let it heal up, and get another one elsewhere. The spouse who likes it gets variety, and the one who doesn't knows "this too shall pass".

On the other hand, tattoos and gaugings are far more permanent. There's no compromise involved. It's about, "I wish to alter my permanent appearance in this way, and ultimately I care more about that than I do your dislike of said change." No matter the slant you put on that, it's egocentrism.

If by some chance I ended up dating the sweet young thing with whom I work (which is going to happen on the Twelfth of Never, since I'm not a pedophile) and as our relationship got more serious I tried to get her to cosmetically restore her earlobes and laser off her tats, I'd be an asshole of the first degree. There would even have to be an expectation on my part of additional tats and gaugings since she's clearly into that, and my objections would be at that point not only ill-advised, but arguably inappropriate. But she'd be just as much an asshole in trying to persuade me to "get just one", if she knew how I felt about them.

JM1776 wrote:In my opinion, it is no longer just your body if you are married or in a profoundly serious relationship.

I guess that is where ideals of what you want from a partner can differ. Personally I can't stand when people say they're looking for someone to "complete them". If that's what you want from someone you're not ready for a relationship of any significance as you don't know who you are, what you want, or what you'd like in a partner. I'm looking from the mindset of wanting someone to complement myself, as an individual.